主题：【原创】涉及离岛争端的几个重要法律文件及其内在关联 -- fride
关于你的问题，我们继续来考据吧。实际上所谓的美日联盟，其条约有两个：一个是51年随着《旧金山和约》签订的《美日安保条约》，还有一个是60年至今美日之间签署的新约。
51年的条约本质上是对《旧金山和约》的一个补充，是美国代理联合国对日本进行战后和平处理并保障其基本安全的一份法律文件，其中值得注意的几点：
1）美国对日的安全保障，其权力基础来源于联合国，并且本质上不应当违反《开罗宣言》和《波茨坦宣言》，并非一般性的双边条约。也就是说虽然这份条约是以双边形式表现的，但其本质依然应当是基于整个旧金山会议的多边协定的一个补充。
2）美国对日本的安全保障，在于保障日本的“集体自卫权”（collective self-defense）。而这一权益实际上也同样来自于《联合国宪章》中对这一权力的规定。在宪章中集体自卫权仅在主权领土得到攻击时才可以实施。
3）这一安保条约的第四条对其失效条件提出了规定
This Treaty shall expire whenever in the opinion of the Governments of the United States of America and Japan there shall have come into force such United Nations arrangements or such alternative individual or collective security dispositions as will satisfactorily provide for the maintenance by the United Nations or otherwise of international peace and security in the Japan Area.
也就是说，联合国对《日美安保条约》是有话事权的。那么如果按照51年条约，作为当下的常任理事国中国是有理据对这项条约提出质疑的。实际上51年条约就其本质不应当被许可对任何战胜国产生威胁。
实际上上述的三个内容在60起生效的新约中并没有被推翻，并且在条约中对联合国的作用得到了明确规定：
Each Party recognizes that an armed attack against either Party in the territories under the administration of Japan would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and declares that it would act to meet the common danger in accordance with its constitutional provisions and processes. Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall be immediately reported to the Security Council of the United Nations in accordance with the provisions of Article 51 of the Charter. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security.
这一条明确规定了日本遭到武装攻击，需要向联合国上报，并且需要联合国授权才可以做出回应
This Treaty does not affect and shall not be interpreted as affecting in any way the rights and obligations of the Parties under the Charter of the United Nations or the responsibility of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security.
这一条明确禁止日美双方把条约以违反《联合国宪章》的权利和义务之方式进行解释。
This Treaty shall remain in force until in the opinion of the Governments of Japan and the United States of America there shall have come into force such United Nations arrangements as will satisfactorily provide for the maintenance of international peace and security in the Japan area. However, after the Treaty has been in force for ten years, either Party may give notice to the other Party of its intention to terminate the Treaty, in which case the Treaty shall terminate one year after such notice has been given.
In witness whereof the undersigned Plenipotentiaries have signed this Treaty.
这一条依然确认了在联合国的安排下可以改签新约。
所以实际上你所说的：
是不正确的说法。因为无论在51年还是在60年的条约中都没有所谓的管辖权说法。其中的军事义务根源自由《联合国宪章》所规定的集体自卫权，而集体自卫权仅限于本国的领土防御。特别还需要强调的是这种自卫权在安保条约中白纸黑字地写着需要上报联合国并受到联合国授权。
至于最后所谓的“自古以来”之说法，其实隐含的就是《海洋法公约》所认可的无主领土主权认定的原则，这个原则在岛屿争端上并不有利。说明以前这方面做得确实不够，即便是对于我们不承认的国际法，也需要好好研究，理解对手的行动逻辑和法理依据，才能够对对方做到精准打击。
本帖一共被 2 帖 引用 (帖内工具实现)
- 相关回复 上下关系8
🙂钓鱼岛主权跟日本没关系。中国拳头硬了和美国讨论才有意义。 bia 字0 2012-09-18 05:38:12
🙂从法理上讲其实跟美国就更没有关系了 7 fride 字653 2012-09-18 06:36:26
🙂文字都有模糊的地方 bia 字522 2012-09-20 05:39:13
🙂这种所谓的解释未必有十足的法律依据
🙂问题在于，军事上是美国人控制钓鱼岛的 hwd99 字76 2012-09-19 20:11:53
🙂补充一下，还有《日本投降书》 76 diamond 字4050 2012-09-18 01:54:59